At issue: Whether the modification of the period to submit the programs for control and prevention of methane emissions in the hydrocarbon sector is unconstitutional.
At issue: Whether Uganda has failed to fulfil its positive obligations under climate change and disaster management law to manage the risk of landslides in the Bududa district.
At issue: Whether an oil exploration focused seismic survey challenges constitutional rights regarding consultation, conservation, cultural and spiritual livelihood while highlighting also negatively impacting climate change.
At issue: Whether the issuance of mining titles for natural resource exploration and exploitation activities in the Combeima and Cocora rivers violated human rights obligations.
At issue: Whether the lack of access to drinking water as a result of a decrease in natural water reservoirs due to climate change and the lack of adequate infrastructure by the Colombian government violated human rights.
At issue: Whether to grant humanitarian protection to individuals exposed to a real risk to their right to life in the country of origin when such risk is due to an adverse social, environmental and climate situation and not to an armed conflict.
At issue: Whether the government's energy decarbonization plan failed to include the participation of workers and violated their human rights under a just transition.
At issue: Whether the SoS’s adoption of the Net Zero Strategy did not discharge his duties under the Climate Change Act 2008, and whether the adoption of the Heat and Buildings Strategy has meant that the SoS has breached the Equality Act 2010 (FoE’s Claim). Whether the SoS’s adoption of the Net Zero Strategy did not discharge his duties under the Climate Change Act 2008, and whether these duties had been interpreted compatibly with human rights obligations (ClientEarth’s and the Good Law Project’s claims).